Author Topic: Rest in Peace, DA  (Read 10805 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Simeon II

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 355
    • View Profile
Re: Rest in Peace, DA
« Reply #45 on: May 21, 2014, 12:37:23 am »
+5%

Just, trying to say, mostly to the other posters, not you smiley35:

- Have a little backbone and voice your opinion what is best for you (us)! Do not just stand up and applause whatever “Stan’ says is ‘The next best thing after the hot water’ “.

- Do not let Stan claim something that is not his, just because “He knows, best what to do with it”.

- And lastly, do not attack someone defending your interest, just to gain points in the eye of the master.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2014, 12:46:13 am by Simeon II »

Offline smiley35

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 168
    • View Profile
Re: Rest in Peace, DA
« Reply #46 on: May 21, 2014, 12:41:00 am »
+5%

Just, trying to say, mostly to the other posters, not you smiley35:

- Have a little backbone and voice your opinion what is best for you (us)! Do not just stand up and applause whatever “Stan’ says is ‘The next best thing after the hot water’ “.

- Do not let Stan claim something that is not his, just because “He knows, best what to do with it”.

- And lastly, do not attack someone defending your interest, just to gain points in the eye of the muster.

 +5%

Sounds like good advice.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2014, 12:45:00 am by smiley35 »

Offline mess

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: Rest in Peace, DA
« Reply #47 on: May 21, 2014, 02:02:12 am »
Quote
But the arrogance it takes for Invictus to treat those 15% of PTS  as theirs, as something that belongs to them...

I suppose everything is a matter of perspective, but currently those funds are earmarked for paying miners to burn electricity.   So the PTS community / shareholders are the ones who should vote on what to do with the remaining PTS.   I3 Ltd (AGS fund) controls something like 20% of PTS and so would benefit greatly (far more than any other single actor) by stopping the dilution of PTS and not giving anything away.   

So it is a question of what the remaining PTS shareholders wish to do.   In the interest of separating development from marketing I have left Stan, Brian, Gregory, and Arlen to work with the community to develop the best plans.    I am not a dictator in these things.

Personally I suggested to them that PTS holders should get some benefit as well: ie give x% to PTS holders.  However, I can also see that we intended there to be equal shares in PTS/AGS long-term. 

In my opinion the arrogance is in assuming we are arrogant.  In reality we are just people trying to do the best by everyone and improve the value of what everyone is holding.

We also would not be changing the deal for PTS holders:  we said that there would be 2M + 1% inflation and reserved the right to fork the chain at any point to upgrade it.  In this particular instance the PTS holders go from having 1% inflation to steady deflation from trx fees.   Still a win for them.

I agree with you it is a matter of perspective. But why can't you consider this from the perspective of investors. Of course you guys are happy with this proposal, since you hold hostage of the fund, which constitutes 20% of total shares. But in our investors' point of view, we have donated more to the AGS fund since PTS has increased in value. Please don't say that you guys are doing this for the mutual benefit of us all, for the whole industry. NO! You are doing this because you want more for yourselves and you are using the PTS we donated and turn them against us.

Due to 3I's repeated history of bouncing checks, most investors (me included) have lost faith in you guys, and it is not unreasonable to put it that Stan's PROMISE of 2x,...10X return is highly improbable. So, please, do us a favor and don't screw up on those unmined PTS!

Pardon me if I am being a troll here. Wish BitShares the best.

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
Re: Rest in Peace, DA
« Reply #48 on: May 21, 2014, 02:12:02 am »
Due to 3I's  history it is not unreasonable to put it that Stan's PROMISE of 2x,...10X return is highly improbable. So, please, do us a favor and don't screw up on those unmined PTS!

If 'improbable' was 'unproven'  I would give +1
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Re: Rest in Peace, DA
« Reply #49 on: May 21, 2014, 02:36:46 am »
Decentralized competition is what we're after.  All we can do is put a product out there and hope people like it.  We encourage competitors to put their own products out there and compete with us!

We have just announced the intention to design an upgrade chain called PTS2 that has DPOS instead of mining and should solve all of the current problems PTS has from using legacy Bitcoin mining code.  Its design will honor PTS holders 1 for 1 and reserve the unallocated/unmined 15% for use increasing its value proposition (demand) for those who choose to hold it.  No different than any developer who announces, say, a 45/45/10 DAC with the 10% reserved to fund development, promotion, and support.  The standard approach we have always been advocating and the freedom we have left for every BitShares developer.

Now here's the thing: 
Every PTS share holder will now ALSO own a PTS2 share!
 
That's how our industry works.  That's how every change proposal happens.  Soft forks and let the industry choose!

Those who like PTS can sell their PTS2 and vice versa.

That's how every shareholder gets a vote - the free market!  What each person chooses to hold and chooses to sell.

So nothing has changed with PTS.  Miners can still mine it. Exchanges can still trade it. Your wallets will still work if they do.

But developers will have to choose which chain they will honor (or perhaps some clever mix).

If the majority of value stays with PTS, developers will be inclined to want to attract its holders.  If the majority prefers PTS2, most developers will honor that.  Over time, the least popular chain will probably die out.  Or not.

Nobody's rights have been violated.  A new competing protoDAC has been announced!  (Something we reserved the right to do from week 1).  Everyone is free to own and honor the one they like best - or both - or even clone their own better alternative.

And so are we.   :)





« Last Edit: May 21, 2014, 03:55:04 am by Stan »
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Re: Rest in Peace, DA
« Reply #50 on: May 21, 2014, 02:43:16 am »
Due to 3I's  history it is not unreasonable to put it that Stan's PROMISE of 2x,...10X return is highly improbable. So, please, do us a favor and don't screw up on those unmined PTS!

If 'improbable' was 'unproven'  I would give +1

I made no such PROMISE. 
I said, "We are aiming for 2x, 3x, ... 10x... growth in value - of the whole industry."

This is the same syndrome that drives most of the false accusations that clutter up this forum.  We share a goal, a mere aspiration, and before you know it it becomes a PROMISE.

 :)
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline tonyk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3308
    • View Profile
Re: Rest in Peace, DA
« Reply #51 on: May 21, 2014, 03:07:26 am »
Stan, seems like you are striving to catch somebody use a wrong word (though the example you try to cash on seems auto/google translation) to prove you did not poop up today.

BTW the guy that posted most angrily today -Simeon - was the guy who brought me to Bitshares, he has more than 3K PTS invested in AGS (pre-Feb 28th PTS, bought for real $ and invested in AGS; so >$24K invested in AGS), so careful when you curse the hand that feeds you.
Lack of arbitrage is the problem, isn't it. And this 'should' solves it.

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Re: Rest in Peace, DA
« Reply #52 on: May 21, 2014, 03:51:04 am »
Wow, Simeon sounds really negative for someone with a stake in this. Have a little patience, people! You might be a billionaire in another year or two, but it's not gonna happen by this time next week! Regarding Stan's use of language, I don't think he's the one that's trying to catch people using a wrong word. He's trying to set the record straight when others twist his words (intentionally or not) into misunderstandings and rumors. If someone in his position is not careful, then pretty soon, these rumors about Invictus' 'promises' spiral out of their control. The last thing they want is people accusing them of over-promising. Goals matter, and Bitshares is aiming to deliver great things.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Re: Rest in Peace, DA
« Reply #53 on: May 21, 2014, 03:52:13 am »
Stan, seems like you are striving to catch somebody use a wrong word (though the example you try to cash on seems auto/google translation) to prove you did not poop up today.

BTW the guy that posted most angrily today -Simeon - was the guy who brought me to Bitshares, he has more than 3K PTS invested in AGS (pre-Feb 28th PTS, bought for real $ and invested in AGS; so >$24K invested in AGS), so careful when you curse the hand that feeds you.

I never curse anybody.    :)
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline mess

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: Rest in Peace, DA
« Reply #54 on: May 21, 2014, 05:34:09 am »
Decentralized competition is what we're after.  All we can do is put a product out there and hope people like it.  We encourage competitors to put their own products out there and compete with us!

We have just announced the intention to design an upgrade chain called PTS2 that has DPOS instead of mining and should solve all of the current problems PTS has from using legacy Bitcoin mining code.  Its design will honor PTS holders 1 for 1 and reserve the unallocated/unmined 15% for use increasing its value proposition (demand) for those who choose to hold it.  No different than any developer who announces, say, a 45/45/10 DAC with the 10% reserved to fund development, promotion, and support.  The standard approach we have always been advocating and the freedom we have left for every BitShares developer.

Now here's the thing: 
Every PTS share holder will now ALSO own a PTS2 share!
 
That's how our industry works.  That's how every change proposal happens.  Soft forks and let the industry choose!

Those who like PTS can sell their PTS2 and vice versa.

That's how every shareholder gets a vote - the free market!  What each person chooses to hold and chooses to sell.

So nothing has changed with PTS.  Miners can still mine it. Exchanges can still trade it. Your wallets will still work if they do.

But developers will have to choose which chain they will honor (or perhaps some clever mix).

If the majority of value stays with PTS, developers will be inclined to want to attract its holders.  If the majority prefers PTS2, most developers will honor that.  Over time, the least popular chain will probably die out.  Or not.

Nobody's rights have been violated.  A new competing protoDAC has been announced!  (Something we reserved the right to do from week 1).  Everyone is free to own and honor the one they like best - or both - or even clone their own better alternative.

And so are we.   :)

So, Stan, you're pretty determined to suck every last bit of value out of PTS, huh.
  • Do you really need more funding for promotion, support, etc? Are 5,000 BTC + 340,000 PTS worth of donations not enough for you?
  • Distributing the remaining PTS to AGS holders are the most obvious solution that would benefit your investors. Can't you see that at all?
  • Don't you have any idea that this move would put you into a position that's against PTS and AGS holders?

I understand completely, that 3I has reserved the right to launch a competing protoDAC, along with other rights that you guys reserved as well, like yeah, "disavow anything you ever said on this forum". Well played.

But if you really want BitShares to succeed, you've got to work for the true benefit of the investors (PTS/AGS holders), instead of playing your little tricks to gradually suck everybody's money into your own pocket. I don't think you guys have the balls to piss the VCs off like this if you were to get money from VCs. And the whole idea of AGS is just scam, but we have no other choice but to donate all our ass off, otherwise our shares got diluted. But you managed to raised millions via AGS anyway. We tolerated it, so could you please just stop asking for money right now and firkin deliver?

Offline mess

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: Rest in Peace, DA
« Reply #55 on: May 21, 2014, 05:44:09 am »
Wow, Simeon sounds really negative for someone with a stake in this. Have a little patience, people! You might be a billionaire in another year or two, but it's not gonna happen by this time next week! Regarding Stan's use of language, I don't think he's the one that's trying to catch people using a wrong word. He's trying to set the record straight when others twist his words (intentionally or not) into misunderstandings and rumors. If someone in his position is not careful, then pretty soon, these rumors about Invictus' 'promises' spiral out of their control. The last thing they want is people accusing them of over-promising. Goals matter, and Bitshares is aiming to deliver great things.

Billionaire in a year or two? What a joke!
Look around the Bitcoin 2.0 space, is it so hard to convince yourself that BitShares is the least competitive one (well, at least up til now)? I don't mean to say that to hurt this community, but come on! Your optimistic viewpoint should be based on real progress they've made instead of some blind belief, is it?
We should urge 3I to put themselves together and go for the right direction, instead of letting them to lead us by the nose.

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Re: Rest in Peace, DA
« Reply #56 on: May 21, 2014, 06:06:36 am »
Do I have to be dead serious with everything I write? Figure of speech, my friend. Obviously, I do believe Bitshares will be successful. Those other "2.0's" are child's play compared to what this will become: a paradigm changer.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2908
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Re: Rest in Peace, DA
« Reply #57 on: May 21, 2014, 06:53:31 am »
Decentralized competition is what we're after.  All we can do is put a product out there and hope people like it.  We encourage competitors to put their own products out there and compete with us!

We have just announced the intention to design an upgrade chain called PTS2 that has DPOS instead of mining and should solve all of the current problems PTS has from using legacy Bitcoin mining code.  Its design will honor PTS holders 1 for 1 and reserve the unallocated/unmined 15% for use increasing its value proposition (demand) for those who choose to hold it.  No different than any developer who announces, say, a 45/45/10 DAC with the 10% reserved to fund development, promotion, and support.  The standard approach we have always been advocating and the freedom we have left for every BitShares developer.

Now here's the thing: 
Every PTS share holder will now ALSO own a PTS2 share!
 
That's how our industry works.  That's how every change proposal happens.  Soft forks and let the industry choose!

Those who like PTS can sell their PTS2 and vice versa.

That's how every shareholder gets a vote - the free market!  What each person chooses to hold and chooses to sell.

So nothing has changed with PTS.  Miners can still mine it. Exchanges can still trade it. Your wallets will still work if they do.

But developers will have to choose which chain they will honor (or perhaps some clever mix).

If the majority of value stays with PTS, developers will be inclined to want to attract its holders.  If the majority prefers PTS2, most developers will honor that.  Over time, the least popular chain will probably die out.  Or not.

Nobody's rights have been violated.  A new competing protoDAC has been announced!  (Something we reserved the right to do from week 1).  Everyone is free to own and honor the one they like best - or both - or even clone their own better alternative.

And so are we.   :)

So, Stan, you're pretty determined to suck every last bit of value out of PTS, huh.
  • Do you really need more funding for promotion, support, etc? Are 5,000 BTC + 340,000 PTS worth of donations not enough for you?
  • Distributing the remaining PTS to AGS holders are the most obvious solution that would benefit your investors. Can't you see that at all?
  • Don't you have any idea that this move would put you into a position that's against PTS and AGS holders?

I understand completely, that 3I has reserved the right to launch a competing protoDAC, along with other rights that you guys reserved as well, like yeah, "disavow anything you ever said on this forum". Well played.

But if you really want BitShares to succeed, you've got to work for the true benefit of the investors (PTS/AGS holders), instead of playing your little tricks to gradually suck everybody's money into your own pocket. I don't think you guys have the balls to piss the VCs off like this if you were to get money from VCs. And the whole idea of AGS is just scam, but we have no other choice but to donate all our ass off, otherwise our shares got diluted. But you managed to raised millions via AGS anyway. We tolerated it, so could you please just stop asking for money right now and firkin deliver?

The issue has nothing to do with capturing more money.
Our AGS-sponsored R&D generated a windfall because the upgraded  PTS2 would not need to hire miners.
We are figuring out what to do with the million dollar windfall.
We are giving it all away.
Sounds pretty sneaky to me!


Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline JoeyD

Re: Rest in Peace, DA
« Reply #58 on: May 21, 2014, 09:27:24 am »
Decentralized competition is what we're after.  All we can do is put a product out there and hope people like it.  We encourage competitors to put their own products out there and compete with us!

We have just announced the intention to design an upgrade chain called PTS2 that has DPOS instead of mining and should solve all of the current problems PTS has from using legacy Bitcoin mining code.  Its design will honor PTS holders 1 for 1 and reserve the unallocated/unmined 15% for use increasing its value proposition (demand) for those who choose to hold it.  No different than any developer who announces, say, a 45/45/10 DAC with the 10% reserved to fund development, promotion, and support.  The standard approach we have always been advocating and the freedom we have left for every BitShares developer.

Now here's the thing: 
Every PTS share holder will now ALSO own a PTS2 share!
 
That's how our industry works.  That's how every change proposal happens.  Soft forks and let the industry choose!

Those who like PTS can sell their PTS2 and vice versa.

That's how every shareholder gets a vote - the free market!  What each person chooses to hold and chooses to sell.

So nothing has changed with PTS.  Miners can still mine it. Exchanges can still trade it. Your wallets will still work if they do.

But developers will have to choose which chain they will honor (or perhaps some clever mix).

If the majority of value stays with PTS, developers will be inclined to want to attract its holders.  If the majority prefers PTS2, most developers will honor that.  Over time, the least popular chain will probably die out.  Or not.

Nobody's rights have been violated.  A new competing protoDAC has been announced!  (Something we reserved the right to do from week 1).  Everyone is free to own and honor the one they like best - or both - or even clone their own better alternative.

And so are we.   :)

So, Stan, you're pretty determined to suck every last bit of value out of PTS, huh.
  • Do you really need more funding for promotion, support, etc? Are 5,000 BTC + 340,000 PTS worth of donations not enough for you?
  • Distributing the remaining PTS to AGS holders are the most obvious solution that would benefit your investors. Can't you see that at all?
  • Don't you have any idea that this move would put you into a position that's against PTS and AGS holders?

I understand completely, that 3I has reserved the right to launch a competing protoDAC, along with other rights that you guys reserved as well, like yeah, "disavow anything you ever said on this forum". Well played.

But if you really want BitShares to succeed, you've got to work for the true benefit of the investors (PTS/AGS holders), instead of playing your little tricks to gradually suck everybody's money into your own pocket. I don't think you guys have the balls to piss the VCs off like this if you were to get money from VCs. And the whole idea of AGS is just scam, but we have no other choice but to donate all our ass off, otherwise our shares got diluted. But you managed to raised millions via AGS anyway. We tolerated it, so could you please just stop asking for money right now and firkin deliver?

Would you mind elaborating, because I don't quite get the logic behind your reasoning.

How do you see this as "sucking" all value and it being a bad thing? I also am a bit confused about the dilution of your shares if you just kept a hold of your PTS. Because from an ROI point of view PTS seems to be the big scam, because they get all the benefits of the AGS fundraiser and the projects that paid for, without needing themselves to invest in anything. I'd like it if someone could explain to me how PTS-holders are not getting anything other than a sickening better deal than people investing directly into AGS.

Could very well be I'm missing some very important points, but if you just number conclusions, without the reasoning that led you to them, that doesn't help in clearing things up.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2014, 09:31:23 am by JoeyD »

Offline mf-tzo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1725
    • View Profile
Re: Rest in Peace, DA
« Reply #59 on: May 21, 2014, 09:56:26 am »
I really don't get what is the frustration here...

Quote
Every PTS share holder will now ALSO own a PTS2 share!

The plan is to distribute the remaining PTS to the existing PTS holders and create 2 mil PTS2 which will also be distributed to the existing PTS holders, or I miss understood something?
For every PTS we hold we will get now +15% PTS and 1PTS2? PTS2 will not need any mining and will be liquid?

How on earth can this not be good?